sabato 18 maggio 2013

Preface written by Don Ferdinando Sudati for the book by
Pier Francesco Zarcone: The Armed
Messiah: Yešū’ Bar Yōseph(published by Massari
editore).

The author of this essay, Pier Francesco Zarcone, is a believer; better yet, an orthodox Christian, graduated in Canonical Law and author of a previous book on Gesus*. He is also a historian of the workers’ movement with an anarchist background and he is an exponent, since several years, of an international political association which defines itself in terms of “red utopianism”. He is also a fine Islamologist and several other things. This should be enough to better frame the intellectual genesis of the book, to understand the emphasis he puts on certain aspects of the text and in order to appreciate the honesty with which he carries out his research. Not very often do we find a layman, someone who is not a theologian by profession, who is competent enough in religious matters and has the ability to communicate his knowledge, through writing, as the Author does. The reader will confront a demanding work, but not at all obscure or complicate, thanks to the style’s transparency. And that is already a great merit.

The armed Messiah deals with a topic very much discussed at the half of the previous century. Even if it attracted a rather elitist attention, it has not lost its momentum, not even at the beginning of this 21st century, while new and deeper historical and biblical inquiries, as well as greater independence from traditional ideologies, allow us to see Jesus’ figure and deeds in a more balanced way. Between an aspiring Messiah who chooses the political and military path in order to subvert Rome’s power, and a non-violent pacifist who rejects the idea of even using vigorous methods to change the oppressive society of his time and establish the kingdom of God, there may be perhaps an intermediate space which could be the one Jesus really filled, or could have occupied in certain moments of his life.

The Author of these pages undoubtedly privileges history, without nevertheless forgetting the theological dimension, because in the case of Jesus it is almost impossible to bring those two aspects neatly apart (see the chapter «The Messiah Jesus’ deification»). This research offers the reader such an amount of general notions around the man Jesus and his time, concerning also successive and even current developments, that it may very well substitute the reading of dozens of books. The appendix chapter is also valuable, a whole historical sequence on heretical movements and religious dissidence within Christianity that reaches the present day.

On the other hand, that element which is unusual for those of us who are not specialist in the matter, is clearly the hypotheses around which the research is woven: a Jesus who had something to do with weapons or who, at least, was not completely alien to them.

Not in the sense of that Jesus’ image on the cover which is far from superficial; a book cover should be attractive, provocative and, as much as possible, should condense the topic of the text. But it is taken for granted that it could, somehow, be independent from the book and so we should not ask too much from it.

The partisan Christ painted by Alfredo Rostgaard is a creation of fantasy - the rifle was not even invented at the time - and nonetheless it interprets an aspect of Christ which is less far-fetched than we would be willing to admit. Many men and women of our time could be able to recognize Jesus and themselves in that image; as a matter of fact, it has been like that in other areas of the world (see, in the Appendix, “Theology of liberation» and «The cross and the gun») because this Jesus is, somehow, also present in the Gospels. Perhaps not exactly armed - there are no such testimonies - but at least in the sense that he did not compel those of his followers who were carrying weapons at the girdle or under their cloaks to get rid of them.

A great expert in Judaism and primitive Christianity considers that Jesus was not exactly planning a political-military messianic campaign, even if his message had quite strong political implications, because it aspired to change social conditions1. The same author notes how Jesus’ group was not wholly pacifist, it was at the very least equipped to defend themselves, as one can read in Mt 26, 51: “And one of those who were with Jesus took the sword, drew it and stroke the servant of the high priest cutting his ear”. In Luke there seems to be more than one follower able to strike with the sword: “Then those who were with him, seeing what was about to happen, said: ‘Sir, should we strike with the sword?’” And in John, the one who brandishes the sword has a name we would not have expected: Simon Peter, although Jesus instructs him to put the sword back in its sheath (Jn 18, 10-11). In a passage it is directly expressed that he addressed his men like this: “But now, whoever has money bring it over and whoever has supplies, he who does not have a sword, let him sell his cloak and buy one.” (Lk 22, 36).

Are these words something we should take for real or just metaphorically? No doubt there is metaphor in: “Do not think I’ve come to bring peace on earth; I have not come to bring peace but sword.” But we are not so sure it is the same with the other phrases. That is, if we were to admit that these are his words, for here we face the issue of ipsissima verba Iesu, that is to say, the attempt, however arduous, to discern how much can be attributed to the pre-Easter Jesus and how much to the free interpretation of the Evangelists and the communities arising from Easter. In any case, before answering that question in a sensible way, let us read this book whose objective is, precisely, to reexamine an aspect which tradition has chosen to neglect and even hide. Not completely, though. As a matter of fact, the operation did not work perfectly because it left some traces, indications and signs which today’s researchers can work upon in order to reconstruct a part of Jesus’ personality which, not so long ago, seemed implausible.

The armed Messiah does not have the goal of being sensationalistic nor substituting the Gospel Jesus with a warmongering one, but to make us understand better some of his ideas and what could have determined, reasonably or not, his being sentenced to death. How to interpret, for instance, that verse which John puts in Jesus’ mouth: “If my kingdom be of this world, my servants would have fought so that I would not be surrendered to the Judaeans” (Jn 18, 36)? What is there behind such words? Can’t we perceive in them, despite the attempts to expurgate them, a rather concrete background? Did they undergo some kind of semantic wash up?

After reading this book, these words have acquired a different sense for me, even if I do not wish to draw premature conclusions. Following a mental association I have thought of a similar verse: “O, do you think I could not pray to my Father who would promptly put at my disposal more than a dozen angelic legions?”(Mt 26, 53). But while this quote from Mathew appears as clearly hyperbolical, John’s retains some meanings which might very well have historical grounds and hide some sort of project or insurrectional event, abandoned later on because it was considered improbable or alien to Jesus’ ideals.

Another outstanding scholar in the study of the historical Jesus has no doubts as to the fact that he proclaimed non-violent resistance against the injustice of Roman imperialism, although he was not the first to do so for there were experiences of Hebrew resistance against Rome, either violent or non-violent, “before, during and after Jesus’ time and […] his program towards the Kingdom of God is inserted within those contemporary alternatives” 2. But also non-violent rebels were executed, although their followers were spared. Pilate’s decision is thus evidence of the revolutionary aspect of Jesus’ actions3.

These are suggestions which add, perhaps, some shades of meaning to the well grounded assertions in our book, whose results I do not want to bring forward because the reader is to discover them by accepting the toil and pleasure of going through its pages.

I do want, nonetheless, to propose a small experiment which has been suggested to me precisely by the Author’s stating that “the most suitable of Jesus’ icons has not been painted yet” and also by one but fleeting reference of his to the Catholic “Sacred Heart” iconography. Let us then suppose that a Christian has the possibility to choose only between two images of Jesus, that of Rostgaard’s partisan and that of the sacred heart Jesus, whose devotion and figure we owe to St. Margherita M. Alacoque (†1690) and, in the more recent version, to St. Faustina Kowalska (†1938). Which one would he choose? Most surely, the second one. Our Catholic fellow could even feel a certain aversion for the other. And, nevertheless, the sacred heart Jesus, however familiar to us and loaded with good feelings, is probably no less equivocal that the Jesus with the rifle hanging on his shoulder. By themselves, they are both false or, if we so desire, truthful as long as they become integrated. Jesus is not that sheepish, not to say kindhearted foolish lad that certain hagiography has wanted to put forward as real. If he has said - or if the saying has been just attributed to him is of little importance now - “learn from me for I am patient and meek in heart” (Mt 11, 29), he has also declared, even if it was in a parable, “out, away from me, you cursed ones, to the eternal fire, which is ready for the devil and his angels” (Mt 25, 41). And in those Christian scriptures, commonly known as Apocalypse, we find plenty of strong, violent and even truculent images displayed around a main character who is either God or the “Son of Man”. This belongs indeed to the apocalyptical and eschatological genre but that is not enough to explain why there appears a Son of Man, “sharp scythe in hand”, not exactly to reap the grain but to harvest upon earth a grape which shall be cast “in the large vessel of God’s anger” and which shall yield, when squeezed, an industrial amount of blood (cf. Ap 14, 14-20).

I do not intend to draw any conclusions in place of the reader. In a certain sense, this is not even done by the Author, who skillfully and most honestly accompanies the reader along his research leaving to him/her the privilege and the responsibility of becoming more or less convinced of the argumentations hereby presented. I would not like to finish this invitation to the fascinating journey proposed by Zarcone’s book without wishing the readers to share my own experience, that is to say, to start a book with a suspicious, not to say distrustful mind in relation to title and topic to go on with increasing interest and end with the conviction of having discovered a new carving of Jesus’ figure and his historical environment. Perhaps the “after” Jesus will not exactly match the Jesus of “before”, but we will have the feeling of better knowing and comprehending him and being also better prepared for a reading of the Gospels which is less naïve and at the same time closer to history and eventually more fruitful because, in the end, we do not have to miss anything of the richness these scriptures represent for our lives.Don Ferdinando Sudati

a) The end does not justify the means, but the means which we use must reflect the essence of the end.

b) Support for the struggle of all peoples against imperialism and/or for their self determination, independently of their political leaderships.

c) For the autonomy and total independence from the political projects of capitalism.

d) The unity of the workers of the world - intellectual and physical workers, without ideological discrimination of any kind (apart from the basics of anti-capitalism, anti-imperialism and of socialism).

e) Fight against political bureaucracies, for direct and councils democracy.

PER LA QUINTA INTERNAZIONALE DEI MOVIMENTI - multilingue

The political association Red Utopia believes that for the construction of the Fifth International it would be beneficial to make use of the cultural patrimony it has acquired during years of formulating theoretical ideas and accumulating practical experience. In light of this heritage, the Fifth should be unitarian, totally open to all the workers of the world - intellectual and physical workers - and without discriminating ideologies (apart from the basics of anti-capitalism, anti-imperialism and of socialism).

We also propose that the Fifth International be organized on the foundation of the principles expressed succinctly in the following very simple sentences (with indications in brackets of the Internationals that are the historical references for the particular points):

a) The end does not justify the means, but the means which we use must reflect the essence of the end. [Priority of ethics (Guevara) and the scientific truth above every other consideration]

b) Support for the struggle of all peoples against imperialism and/or for their self determination, independently of their political leaderships. [Beginning of the Third International]

c) For the autonomy and total independence from the political projects of capitalism. [The Left of Zimmerwald from the Second International]

d) The unity of the workers of the world - intellectual and physical workers, without ideological discrimination of any kind (apart from the basics of anti-capitalism, anti-imperialism and of socialism). [First International]

e) Fight against political bureaucracies, for direct and councils democracy. [Anti-authoritarian International of Saint-Imier and the Fourth International]

f) Save all life on the Planet, save humanity. [Real new historical task of the Fifth].